Passed Alliance Warehouse

Would you like to see this idea implemented?

  • Yes

    Votes: 70 70.7%
  • No

    Votes: 29 29.3%

  • Total voters
    99
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

DeletedUser

Guest
it will help people that are low points, gain faster it also will have a lock so it is not over used
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Ok i can see this helps prevent any abuse but what I am trying to get at is that I don't see any real point in this being introduced. I don't see that it adds any real benefits to the game...
 

DeletedUser

Guest
i dont see this as necessary to be honest and i can't see how it would improve the game. It would also be a monumental task for the leaders to assign each player an amount they could take out when you have alliances with 200 members.

Also I haven't actually seen a decent reason why this would enhance the game, just lots of comments saying why not...

What benefits does this have to justify such a massive change to the game dynamics?

It's not each player. It's each type of player. Individual settings for each player have been stated, but I agree that it is a monumental task so I have simplified it.

The reason of this is to have a central repository. Under the current system, resources belong to the players, not the alliance. Also, this would make it better in times of war, when alliances use the resources gained in peacetime to spend their way through war.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
but then you have to use those resources for upgradding that city and building troops there duh.

isn't that the object of the game summed up there?

people have done fine thus far without needing to pool resources as when you get resources you spend them ASAP to grow as fast as possible. Storing vast ammounts just means it will take longer to build up...
 

DeletedUser

Guest
the big city player donate the reasources and the lower points players take them to build up
stronger
 

DeletedUser

Guest
what I see is large players, will not donating but, instead make the most withdraws.

the writing is on the wall. large MRA goes to war vs normal 40 man alliance larger players say are cities are built for massive troops your (smaller members) not at our level yet. they ask every small player to give a few resources.

this will not help the avg. to small players nor will it help the normal to small alliance this is made to tax the smaller players of a MRA. with a Disclaimer spin of helping the smaller player

I would like to see a city cap like if you have more then 10 cities you can't withdraw from this warehouse or something like that so it has a chance of helping those intended.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Guest
And i suppose you are talking from experince ?

The Pro's and Cons HAVE been pointed out all ready.

And would you for Christ's sake, Start spelling in FULL words ?

It's like trying to read a damn magazine that's fully written in slang.

~V
 

DeletedUser

Guest
what I see is large players, will not donating but, instead make the most withdraws.

the writing is on the wall. large MRA goes to war vs normal 40 man alliance larger players say are cities are built for massive troops your (smaller members) not at our level yet. they ask every small player to give a few resources.

this will not help the avg. to small players nor will it help the normal to small alliance this is made to tax the smaller players of a MRA. with a Disclaimer spin of helping the smaller player

I would like to see a city cap like if you have more then 10 cities you can't withdraw from this warehouse or something like that so it has a chance of helping those intended.

I have put in as much abuse prevention as possible. If your alliance would tax you unfairly, find a new one
 

DeletedUser

Guest
seriously if they take more rescources than you like i have one word for you
LEAVEEEEEE
 

DeletedUser2663

Guest
I think people keep seeing this in the context of being in a bad alliance. i have noticed Most of the players who support this and have tried to give feedback and improvement are in repsected alliances ( other words good ones ).

if you are in a bad alliance then of course this idea will be horrible not because of the idea itself but because the alliance sucks. as many people have siad its not the idea, its the alliance. so for all you negative posters think about if you were in a "GOOD" alliance
 

DeletedUser

Guest
leadership changes, alliances merge, people in leadership always think they know the best way to use resources.

Any big player can help a small player via the trade ..... so not really needed.

I don't really see the point other then large players pooling the resources for themselves. Which can happen in this system.

like I said, a city cap on these warehouses would prevent most abuses and from large players.

Sense this is in the voting stage, It can't be changed. So i don't like the idea as purposed.

and no, my alliance most likely wouldn't need a system like this, this type of system would most likely be used by a mass recruiting alliance. Where the members of the alliance are so far apart trade is unreasonable.

I'm sure locally they can still use trade just fine
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser2663

Guest
*sigh's heavily*.

its not just for trade reasons but also for times of war. Put it this way. when two good alliances go head to head to cost of troops lost will stack in the millions (yes this is true, disbelieve it if you want, but i would just say you oviously havnt been in a good big alliance). simple as that. at a rate up somewhere bewteen 500-1k depending on server speed, mine lvls, merchant or not you regain those resources needed. now to rebuild say a slinger nuke you would need 100k wood 180k rock and 80k silver. now divide that by 500/1k per hour and there you go, aprox 180 hours for that city to produce enough resources to build it. thats a over a week that city will be out of action. with an alliance warehouse that will be reduced as there is that stockpile of resources there to be used and will keep frontline attackers attacking as they will have acces to emergeny funds or if he say lost all of his troops it allows him to build a decent size defense b4 the counter attack. its a way for those members who are over 50 hours from the combat can make a difference to the war. and it wont unbalance the game as both sides have acces to this feature.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
@whateverr:

It takes time for the resources to go to and from. Also, this is not an MRA's dream. It is meant to be the opposite. Take this scenario:

An MRA goes to war. With lax access limitations and poor warehouse defense, the resources go very low in the alliance warehouse as people hoard the resources for their own use. MRA, due to lack of funds, surrenders, and whatever is left of it joins the other elite alliance.

Take this scenario.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top